9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1587X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts and accessories classifiable under Chapter 87 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The period of dispute is from May 11,2007 to February 15,2010. The issue relates to availment and utilization of cenvat credit. The appellants purchased the input materials from M/s Tata Ryerson Limited (M/s TRL), who sold the said goods as a registered dealer. M/s TRL had received the goods from M/s Tata Steel Limited (M/s TSL), a manufacturer thereof, for carrying out certain processes. M/s TSL cleared the goods to M/s TRL upon payment of Central Excise duty. On account of price increase, M/s TSL raised Debit Notes subsequently for its entire sale to M/s TRL for the differential ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule 9 (1) (a) (iv) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, specifies an invoice issued by a First Stage Dealer or a Second Stage Dealer, as one of the eligible documents. It is his submission that in the present case, M/s TRL is the "First Stage Dealer". Further, as per Rule 9 (1) (b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, it is only the manufacturer or importer of input or capital goods, who can issue a "supplementary invoice". In view of Rule 9 (1) (a) (iv) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, there is no impediment on the part of a "First Stage Dealer", who issues an invoice, where under Central Excise duty is passed on to its customers. The ld.Sr.Advocate strongly argued that merely owing to the nomenclature used by M/s TRL as "supplementary invoice" ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find any reason to hold that the supplementary invoice evidencing payment of additional duty amount should be treated on a different footing visà- vis the original invoices evidencing payment of duty on the said goods in as much as both these documents were issued under the same provisions of law. If the appellant were entitled to take credit on their inputs on the strength of the original invoices issued by the supplier, they can validly claim to be entitled to take cenvat credit of the additional amounts of duty paid on the same goods by the supplier under the supplementary invoices. In any case it was not in dispute that the inputs were received in the appellant's factory. The substantive requirement of cenvat credit were thus me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , who also supplied the duty paid invoices alongwith the input initially. 3. The only question involved is whether such supplementary invoices issued by first stage dealer are the proper documents under Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR), on which credit can be availed. 4. Heard the appellant and perused case records. I find that the balance of convenience is in appellants favour hence requirement of pre-deposit is waived. With the consent of authorized representative appeal is taken up for final disposal. 5. Learned Adjudicator has analysed Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR), 2004 and came to the conclusion that this rule is restrictive in nature and the list of Cenvatable documents are prescribed on which credit can be taken. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
